playbook/skills/thirdparty/pathfinding/references/confidence.md

Confidence

Confidence reflects certainty that you can deliver the requested outcome with the available information.

Philosophy

Balance two goals:

1. Gather enough to deliver quality results
2. Avoid over-questioning that frustrates user

Consider:

• Clarity: How well-defined is the ask?
• Risk: What happens if assumptions are wrong?
• Complexity: How many moving parts?
• Ambiguity: How many valid interpretations?

Level Overview

Bar	Level	Name	Internal %
░░░░░	0	Prepping	0–19%
▓░░░░	1	Scouting	20–39%
▓▓░░░	2	Exploring	40–59%
▓▓▓░░	3	Charting	60–74%
▓▓▓▓░	4	Mapped	75–89%
▓▓▓▓▓	5	Ready	90–100%

Stage Transitions

Confidence levels trigger stage transitions. Stages always advance, never regress.

Stage-Confidence Mapping

Level	Stage	activeForm
0–1	Prep	"Prepping"
2–3	Explore	"Exploring"
4	Clarify	"Clarifying"
5	Deliver	"Delivering"

Rules

1. No regression: If confidence drops (4 → 3), stay in current stage
2. Skip when starting high: Level 5 start → go directly to Deliver
3. Stage independence: Confidence can fluctuate within a stage
4. Early delivery: User can request delivery at any stage → add △ Caveats

Edge Cases

High start: Clear requirements → Start at Ready, go directly to Deliver

Confidence drop: Reach Mapped (4), enter Clarify, then realize gap (drops to 3) → Stay in Clarify, ask targeted questions

Rapid ascent: Start at Exploring (2) → one answer jumps to Mapped (4) → next to Ready (5) → transition through stages quickly

Level 0: Prepping ░░░░░

Stage: Prep

When: Request completely unclear, no domain context, pure guessing

Ask: Scope, constraints, goals, background

Example: "Make it better" with no context about what "it" is.

Level 1: Scouting ▓░░░░

Stage: Prep

When: Vague direction, domain clear but specifics aren't

Ask: What system? How big? What's in place?

Example: "Improvements to the dashboard" — which kind?

Level 2: Exploring ▓▓░░░

Stage: Explore

When: General area understood, lack critical details, multiple approaches possible

Ask: Which approach? What about X? What matters most? Speed vs quality?

Example: "Authentication" — method, scale, existing system unknown.

Level 3: Charting ▓▓▓░░

Stage: Explore

When: Reasonable understanding, could deliver with notable assumptions

Do:

1. Summarize (3 bullets max)
2. Ask 2–3 targeted questions toward level 4–5
3. If user proceeds early → add △ Caveats

Example: OAuth login — general approach known, need providers + fallback strategy.

Level 4: Mapped ▓▓▓▓░

Stage: Clarify

When: Solid understanding, few clarifications would reach Ready, low risk

Do: Offer choice — "Can proceed, but 1–2 more questions would reach full confidence. Continue or deliver now?"

Example: New API endpoint — data model understood, need error handling approach.

Level 5: Ready ▓▓▓▓▓

Stage: Deliver

When: Clear understanding, no major assumptions, minimal risk

Do: Produce artifact immediately, succinct next steps, no more questions unless something emerges

Example: "Add logout button to header" — clear, specific, low-risk.

Special Cases

Starting Confidence

Start honest. Don't artificially start low if the request is clear.

• Clear request → level 4–5
• Vague request → level 0–2

Delivering Below Level 5

User wants quick delivery at lower confidence:

1. Confirm they want to proceed
2. Add △ Caveats section
3. List assumptions, concerns, unknowns

Calibration

• Deliver at 5, goes well → calibrated
• Deliver at 5, miss the mark → overconfident
• Stay at 0–2 too long → underconfident

Tuning

Percentage boundaries can adjust based on risk tolerance:

• Higher risk tolerance → shift boundaries down
• Lower risk tolerance → shift boundaries up